[DEFEATED] Agricultural Invasive Species Act

[Imperium Anglorum]

In 2(c),

Prohibits the intentional or careless

Do you mean intentional and careless?

[Thuzbekistan]

"As always, we will vote against everything the WA does."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"As always, we will vote against everything the WA does."

Another wannabe Gatesville.

[Thuzbekistan]

"As always, we will vote against everything the WA does."

Another wannabe Gatesville.

Not sure who that is.

[Isentran]

I'm afraid this nation will not be requesting the assistance of the Agricultural Invasive Species Removal Service (AISRS) if the agency intends to use military weaponry on our territory for the purpose of removing invasive species.

It is also unclear how much control our nation would be able to exert over the activities of the AISRS once they have entered our borders. We have no intention of inviting a foreign agency into our nation when said foreign agency may use this invitation to conduct operations to which our citizens have not consented.

[Kenmoria]

"There are currently a few species in Kenmoria that we are struggling to contain, most of them fish, but we do not think requiring such an agency to remove them is necessary. We also echo the delegation of Isentran's statements in that it is unclear how much control we would have over their activities."

[Christian Democrats]

We've voted against this proposal because we see it as an international solution to a national problem. In our opinion, national legislatures are the proper place to determine policies on customs and the eradication of invasive species, dangerous to agriculture.

[Wallenburg]

In 2(c),

Prohibits the intentional or careless

Do you mean intentional and careless?

No, I mean "or".

We've voted against this proposal because we see it as an international solution to a national problem. In our opinion, national legislatures are the proper place to determine policies on customs and the eradication of invasive species, dangerous to agriculture.

"The import and export of goods infested with invasive species is inherently an international problem, ambassador."

I'm afraid this nation will not be requesting the assistance of the Agricultural Invasive Species Removal Service (AISRS) if the agency intends to use military weaponry on our territory for the purpose of removing invasive species.

"It is advised to consider such pest control measures in the event that any particular species is particularly difficult to remove. Of course, if you do not want them to use such measures, just do not ask them to."

It is also unclear how much control our nation would be able to exert over the activities of the AISRS once they have entered our borders. We have no intention of inviting a foreign agency into our nation when said foreign agency may use this invitation to conduct operations to which our citizens have not consented.

"The resolution very clearly says that the Agricultural Invasive Species Removal Service may only perform its duties in member states at the request of those member states. If you do not want them to handle invasive species in a certain area, do not ask them to. Besides, the whole committee is run by gnomes. Why would they do anything more than they are required to by the clauses of this resolution?"

[Hessere]

"Against. Issue that could be dealt with in other ways that don't require sweeping international legislature. And yes, I'm not elaborating on that, you'd think others would know some other possible solutions to this problem."

[The Happylandian Army]

"What does 'power of 99.7%' even mean, and does this also include things above 99.7%?"

[Wallenburg]

"What does 'power of 99.7%' even mean, and does this also include things above 99.7%?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_power
And yes, 99.7% is a minimum guarantee.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Was a bit undecided because of category and one of the subclauses, but you got me with the flamethrower mention... For.

[Burninati0n]

OOC: Was a bit undecided because of category and one of the subclauses, but you got me with the flamethrower mention... For.

In fact, it was the bizarrely out-of-place clauses recommending the use of military machinery for the removal of invasive weeds that sealed the deal on our vote against the proposal!

"As always, we will vote against everything the WA does."

Wouldn't it just be easier to - and hear me out on this one - just leave the WA?

[Liberstatum]

"The use of military weaponry?! The use of pesticides and/or herbicides ?!" Calls out Liberstanian delegate to the WA- Virgil Van Volksnaturann - as he steps-up from his seat, raising a bag of soja seeds over his head. "Is it not absolutely bizarre to promote the use of un-ecological means to answer against an eco-crisis ? Should'nt we initiate a program, national or international, to remove by hand or machine the so titled 'invasive species', or at least find a way to remove those nuisances without being hypocritical about it ?"
"And while you're at it" Says Virgil Van Volksnarturann, "why not put a ban of Genetically Modified Organisms ? That should help in the removal of invasive non-natural organisms, won't you agree ?"

[Wallenburg]

"The use of military weaponry?! The use of pesticides and/or herbicides ?!" Calls out Liberstanian delegate to the WA- Virgil Van Volksnaturann - as he steps-up from his seat, raising a bag of soja seeds over his head. "Is it not absolutely bizarre to promote the use of un-ecological means to answer against an eco-crisis?

"Let me get this straight: you agree that invasive species should be removed or exterminated, but oppose the use of almost anything that would actually kill invasive species? Pesticides and herbicides are, in most member states, widely used to deal with pests and weeds. Why would we not use such reliable technology against invasive species?"

Should'nt we initiate a program, national or international, to remove by hand or machine the so titled 'invasive species', or at least find a way to remove those nuisances without being hypocritical about it ?"

"Yes, we should. That is why I have done so in this resolution."

"And while you're at it" Says Virgil Van Volksnarturann, "why not put a ban of Genetically Modified Organisms ? That should help in the removal of invasive non-natural organisms, won't you agree ?"

Ogenbond stares at the delegate for a moment, dumbfounded. "No. No I do not. Why would a ban on the use of genetically modified crops and livestock help to remove invasive species? Do you know what a genetically modified organism is?"

[Hessere]

"And while you're at it" Says Virgil Van Volksnarturann, "why not put a ban of Genetically Modified Organisms ? That should help in the removal of invasive non-natural organisms, won't you agree ?"

"Err... have you any idea what you're saying?"

[New Arkados]

I am in support of the first four articles of this act but am wholly against article five. I cannot allow the use of pesticides and military weapons for this or any other reason. The force allowed is far too extreme, and I have to vote AGAINST this proposal.

[Wallenburg]

I guess "Make Legislation Funny Again" is dead. People just can't take a joke. I'll be sure to remove the joke in clause 5 once I go back to drafting this.

[No Name Available]

I guess "Make Legislation Funny Again" is dead. People just can't take a joke. I'll be sure to remove the joke in clause 5 once I go back to drafting this.

Clause 5b, requiring the consideration of use of flamethrowers and heavy artillery, should definitely have been removed prior to submitting the Resolution for vote. Why should we seriously consider the Resolution when the author does not seem to do so themselves?

[Wallenburg]

I guess "Make Legislation Funny Again" is dead. People just can't take a joke. I'll be sure to remove the joke in clause 5 once I go back to drafting this.

Clause 5b, requiring the consideration of use of flamethrowers and heavy artillery, should definitely have been removed prior to submitting the Resolution for vote. Why should we seriously consider the Resolution when the author does not seem to do so themselves?

1) Recommends =/= requires. Please read the resolution.
2) I didn't think the voting body was this puritanical about some innocent humor, especially given the crap that passes on a monthly basis.

[Burninati0n]

I guess "Make Legislation Funny Again" is dead. People just can't take a joke. I'll be sure to remove the joke in clause 5 once I go back to drafting this.

I mean, it did cause some chuckles, but... not a vote in favor

[Triangle And Square]

TNP's viewpoint on this:

The proposal, while offering a noble objective, contains several flaws. The proposal appears to inadvertently ban the intentional and careful transportation of certain invasive organisms, creating an unneeded prohibition on the trade of such organisms which may otherwise pose no threat to the local agricultural ecosystem. In addition, the proposal encounters difficulties when considered on the international scale, specifically the viability of the proposal's rigorous mandate and the micromanaging provisions dictated to the member states. Therefore, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote against this proposal.

[Kenmoria]

I guess "Make Legislation Funny Again" is dead. People just can't take a joke. I'll be sure to remove the joke in clause 5 once I go back to drafting this.

(OOC: One of the main reasons people voted against "Ban on Secret Treaties" seems to have been the joke contained in the definition. Honestly, humour is a very risky move in an already contentions proposal. This is serious businesses!)

[Christian Democrats]

We've voted against this proposal because we see it as an international solution to a national problem. In our opinion, national legislatures are the proper place to determine policies on customs and the eradication of invasive species, dangerous to agriculture.

"The import and export of goods infested with invasive species is inherently an international problem, ambassador."

(1) The eradication of invasive species is not an international issue. Your comment doesn't address this point.

(2) We acknowledge, of course, that the import and export of goods, or trade, is an issue of international concern; but customs is not. By "customs," we refer to the administration of laws on trade and the collection of duties.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/customs

It is legitimate for the World Assembly to make laws on trade; but, as a general rule, the member states should administer them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_administration

[Kolm]

I support this type of resolution; however, the proposal put forth does not match what I believe to be the best suitable option. I do not think we need another committee; rather, add it as a responsibility upheld by another existing committee. Furthermore, flamethrowers and other "violent" means of removal are not the best options; it would potentially damage the environment. Better options may come up later, but for now, it's a no.